Next Article in Journal
All-Trans Retinoic Acid-Responsive LGR6 Is Transiently Expressed during Myogenic Differentiation and Is Required for Myoblast Differentiation and Fusion
Next Article in Special Issue
BSR1, a Rice Receptor-like Cytoplasmic Kinase, Positively Regulates Defense Responses to Herbivory
Previous Article in Journal
A Comparative Study on the Effects of Different Sources of Carboxymethyl Poria Polysaccharides on the Repair of DSS-Induced Colitis in Mice
Previous Article in Special Issue
Importin β1 Mediates Nuclear Entry of EIN2C to Confer the Phloem-Based Defense against Aphids
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
IJMS
Volume 24
Issue 10
10.3390/ijms24109037
ijms-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Characterization of Disease Resistance Induced by a Pyrazolecarboxylic Acid Derivative in Arabidopsis thaliana

by
Michiko Yasuda
1,†,
Moeka Fujita
2,†,
Khamsalath Soudthedlath
3,
Miyuki Kusajima
4,
Hideki Takahashi
5,
Tomoya Tanaka
2,
Futo Narita
2,
Tadao Asami
4,
Akiko Maruyama-Nakashita
3 and
Hideo Nakashita
1,2,*
1
Plant Acquired Immunity Research Unit, RIKEN Advanced Science Institute, Wako 351-0198, Japan
2
Department of Bioscience and Biotechnology, Fukui Prefectural University, Fukui 910-1195, Japan
3
Graduate School of Bioresource and Bioenvironmental Sciences, Kyushu University, Fukuoka 819-0395, Japan
4
Graduate School of Agricultural and Life Sciences, The University of Tokyo, Tokyo 113-8657, Japan
5
Graduate School of Agricultural Science, Tohoku University, Sendai 980-8572, Japan
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
†
These authors contributed equally to this work.
Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2023, 24(10), 9037; https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms24109037
Submission received: 30 December 2022 / Revised: 9 April 2023 / Accepted: 16 May 2023 / Published: 20 May 2023
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Signal Transduction Mechanism in Plant Disease and Immunity)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
Systemic acquired resistance (SAR) is a potent innate immunity system in plants that is induced through the salicylic acid (SA)-mediated signaling pathway. Here, we characterized 3-chloro-1-methyl-1H-pyrazole-5-carboxylic acid (CMPA) as an effective SAR inducer in Arabidopsis. The soil drench application of CMPA enhanced a broad range of disease resistance against the bacterial pathogen Pseudomonas syringae and fungal pathogens Colletotrichum higginsianum and Botrytis cinerea in Arabidopsis, whereas CMPA did not show antibacterial activity. Foliar spraying with CMPA induced the expression of SA-responsible genes such as PR1, PR2 and PR5. The effects of CMPA on resistance against the bacterial pathogen and the expression of PR genes were observed in the SA biosynthesis mutant, however, while they were not observed in the SA-receptor-deficient npr1 mutant. Thus, these findings indicate that CMPA induces SAR by triggering the downstream signaling of SA biosynthesis in the SA-mediated signaling pathway.

1. Introduction

Systemic acquired resistance (SAR) is a defense mechanism that is induced in the whole plant body after a hypersensitive response, including tissue necrosis caused by pathogens, through the salicylic acid (SA)-mediated signaling pathway [1,2,3]. As SAR is effective against a broad range of pathogens, it plays an important role in defending plants from pathogen attacks. SAR in Arabidopsis thaliana has been well characterized, and a set of pathogenesis-related (PR) genes have been identified as SAR marker genes [4,5,6,7]. Additionally, various types of SAR-deficient Arabidopsis mutants have been identified and used to investigate the mechanism of SAR. The SA biosynthesis-deficient mutant sid2 contains a mutation in the Isochorismate Synthase 1 (ICS1) gene [8]. The isochorismate generated in chloroplasts is transferred to the cytosol by Enhanced Disease Susceptibility 5 (EDS5) and converted into isochorismate-9-glutamate by AvrPphB Susceptible 3 (PBS3), which is then converted into SA by Enhanced Pseudomonas Susceptibility 1 (EPS1) [9,10]. Other mutant plants include members of the SA signal-deficient Nonexpressor of PR Genes 1 (npr1) family, which have a mutation in the SA receptor protein [11,12,13,14], and NahG transgenic plants, which are unable to accumulate SA because they express the SA-degrading enzyme salicylate hydroxylase [6,7]. During SAR induction, the NPR1 proteins are reduced and transferred from the cytoplasm to the nucleus, in which an increase in the total glutathione (GSH) level takes part [15,16].
As SAR can protect the whole plant body against a broad spectrum of diseases, chemicals capable of inducing SAR have been exploited and used as plant activators to control economically important diseases in crop fields [17,18,19,20,21]. Such chemical activators exhibit several essential criteria for SAR inducers: induction of a broad spectrum of disease resistance, no or weak antibiotic activity against pathogens, and induction of SAR molecular markers such as PR gene expression. Some of these chemicals and their derivatives have been used to elucidate the mechanisms of SAR [15,22,23,24,25,26]. Benzo-(1,2,3)-thiadiazole-7-carbothioic acid S-methyl ester (BTH) stimulates downstream SA biosynthesis in the SAR signaling pathway [18,22], whereas 1,2-benzisothiazol-3(2H)-one1,1-dioxide (BIT) induces SAR by activating SA biosynthesis [24,27]. Similarly to BTH, 3-chloro-1-methyl-1H-pyrazole-5-carboxylic acid (INA) [16,28] and N-cyanomethyl-2-chloroisonicotinamide (NCI) [29,30,31] act at the site of the SA-mediated signaling pathway downstream of SA biosynthesis. In Arabidopsis, the induction of disease resistance by these chemicals requires a signaling pathway mediated by SA and the NPR1 proteins but not by jasmonic acid (JA) or ethylene (ET).
We previously reported that a pyrazolecarboxylic acid derivative, 3-chloro-1-methyl-1H-pyrazole-5-carboxylic acid (CMPA), induced disease resistance in rice against rice blast and bacterial blight [32,33], and it induced PR gene expression and disease resistance without SA accumulation in tobacco [34]. However, as the SA receptor-deficient mutant is not available in tobacco, the issue of whether CMPA activates the SA-mediated signaling pathway for SAR induction remains unelucidated. As the physicochemical properties of water-soluble CMPA are different from those of water-insoluble BTH, INA, and NCI, CMPA may activate pathways other than the SA–NPR1-mediated signaling pathway. Therefore, in this study, we aimed to determine how CMPA activates disease resistance using Arabidopsis plants.

2. Results

2.1. Induction of a Broad Range of Disease Resistance in Arabidopsis by CMPA

The ability of CMPA to enhance disease resistance in wild-type Arabidopsis (Col-0) was assessed using several virulent pathogens, including the hemi-biotrophic bacterial pathogen Pseudomonas syringae pv. tomato DC3000 (Pst), which causes bacterial speck; the hemi-biotrophic fungal pathogen Colletotrichum higginsianum (Ch), which causes anthracnose; the necrotrophic fungal pathogen Botrytis cinerea (Bc), which causes gray mold; and the viral pathogen cucumber mosaic virus (CMV). Soil drenching treatment with 0.25 mg/pot CMPA and foliar treatment with 1.25 mM did not cause any morphological changes or growth inhibition in plants, whereas foliar treatment with more than 6.25 mM CMPA resulted in tissue necrosis similar to a hypersensitive reaction (Supplementary Figure S1).
Susceptibility to Pst was estimated by measuring the bacterial growth in leaf tissues three days after the challenge inoculation. Treatment with 0.25 mg/pot CMPA by means of soil drenching five days prior to the challenge inoculation inhibited bacterial growth in the infected tissues relative to that in the water-treated control plants (96% reduction from the control) (Figure 1A). CMPA at concentrations of up to 200 µg/mL did not affect the growth rate of Pst in the liquid culture (Supplementary Table S1). These results indicated that CMPA enhanced resistance against Pst by activating the plant immune system.
Susceptibility to Ch was estimated using the area of necrotrophic lesions that appeared on the detached leaves two days after drop inoculation. Foliar treatment with 1.25 mM CMPA five days prior to the challenge inoculation reduced the ratio of the lesion area to infected leaf area compared to the untreated control plants (37% reduction from the control) (Figure 1B), indicating that CMPA enhanced resistance against Ch in Arabidopsis.
Disease resistance against Bc was estimated by measuring the size of the necrotrophic lesions that appeared on the infected leaves three days after drop inoculation. Foliar treatment with 1.25 mM CMPA was performed five days prior to the challenge inoculation. The ratio of spreading lesions to the whole infected leaves was significantly smaller in the CMPA-treated plants than in the untreated control plants (34% reduction from the control) (Figure 1C), indicating that CMPA enhanced resistance against Bc in Arabidopsis.
The effects of CMPA on CMV were estimated by detecting the viral coat protein in the plant tissues. Plants were foliar treated with 0.625 mM CMPA five days prior to the CMV inoculation. The results indicated that treatment with CMPA did not affect the viral multiplication and spread in the infected plants (Supplementary Figure S2).

2.2. Physiological Changes Associated with CMPA-Induced Resistance

To characterize the disease resistance induced by CMPA, we examined the physiological changes in the CMPA-treated wild-type plants. A gene expression analysis of SAR marker genes in the plants after two days of CMPA treatment was performed using the reverse transcription–quantitative polymerase chain reaction (RT–qPCR). The expression levels of PR1, PR2, and PR5 were upregulated in the CMPA-treated plants compared with those in the untreated control plants (Figure 2A). The upregulation was similar to treatment with the SAR-inducing chemicals BIT and BTH (Figure 2A), indicating that CMPA activated the SA-mediated signaling pathway. The expression of the SA biosynthetic enzyme ICS1 was unchanged with the CMPA and BTH treatments, whereas BIT upregulated its expression (Figure 2A). The expression levels of the JA-related genes VSP2 and PDF1.2 and the ET-related gene ERF1 were not significantly different between the CMPA-treated plants and untreated control plants (Figure 2B), indicating that CMPA did not activate the JA- and ET-mediated signaling pathways. Endogenous SA accumulation in the leaves was examined two and five days after treatment with CMPA. The levels of free and total SA (free SA + SA glucoside) were not significantly different from those of the untreated control plants (Figure 3A). Increased endogenous GSH levels are important for SAR induction, and the level of GSH increased more than two-fold after two days of CMPA treatment (Figure 3B). These results indicated that CMPA induced SAR in Arabidopsis without SA accumulation.

2.3. Effects of CMPA on SA-Deficient Mutant Plants

To confirm whether SA biosynthesis was required for SAR induction by CMPA, we examined the effects of CMPA on the gene expression and disease resistance in sid2 mutants defective in SA biosynthesis and NahG transgenic plants constitutively expressing SA hydroxylase, an SA-degrading enzyme. The expression levels of PR1, PR2, and PR5 were significantly upregulated in the sid2 mutant by CMPA and BTH but not by BIT (Figure 4A). CMPA treatment induced disease resistance against Pst in both the sid2 and NahG plants (Figure 4B). These results indicated that SA biosynthesis was not required for the disease resistance and enhanced expression of SAR marker genes induced by CMPA.

2.4. Effects of CMPA on SA Receptor-Deficient Mutant Plants

Analyses using wild-type and SA-deficient plants indicated that CMPA induced disease resistance and expression of SAR marker genes in an SA biosynthesis-independent manner. To determine whether SA-mediated signaling for PR gene expression was required for the CMPA-induced disease resistance, we examined the effects of CMPA on defense gene expression and disease resistance in npr1 mutants defective in the SA receptor protein. The expression of PR1, PR2, and PR5 did not increase in the CMPA-, BIT-, or BTH-treated plants, indicating that NPR1 was required for PR gene expression by CMPA (Figure 5A). The Pst inoculation assay showed that CMPA and the other SAR inducers did not enhance disease resistance in the npr1 mutants (Figure 5B). These results indicated that SA-mediated signaling through the NPR1 protein was required for SAR induction by CMPA.

3. Discussion

CMPA, without antimicrobial activity, enhanced disease resistance to a broad range of pathogens, including bacterial and fungal pathogens, and induced the expression of SAR marker genes in wild-type Arabidopsis plants, indicating that CMPA fulfills the criteria for a plant activator [18]. CMPA induced disease resistance and PR gene expression in the SA-deficient sid2 mutant and NahG transgenic plant but not in the npr1 mutant, indicating that CMPA induced SAR by activating SA-mediated signaling downstream of SA biosynthesis, as well as by BTH. This observation was supported by the ICS1, VSP2, PDF1.2, and ERF1 expression or SA accumulation in the wild-type plants not being affected by CMPA.
Gray mold is an important disease requiring control because Bc causes disease in more than 200 plant species. Although Bc is a necrotrophic pathogen that does not induce SA-mediated signaling upon infection [35], the induction of resistance against Bc by exogenous SA or BTH has been reported in several plants, including Arabidopsis, tomato, and tobacco [36,37,38,39]. As CMPA is effective against Bc in Arabidopsis, it could also be effective in controlling gray mold in other plants, such as tomatoes and tobacco.
Although the physicochemical properties of water-soluble CMPA are different from those of water-insoluble BTH, INA, and NCI, their modes of action for resistance induction to Pst are similar. Whether CMPA acts directly on the NPR1 protein is unknown; however, this water-soluble plant activator might enable us to clarify the interaction between the plant activator and the NPR1 protein [13,14].
A carboxyl group at the five position of the pyrazole ring of CMPA is important for its SAR-inducing activity in rice [32]. Another SAR-inducing chemical with pyrazole moiety, 4-{3-[(3,5-dichloro-2-hydroxybenzylidene)amino]propyl}-4,5-dihydro-1H-pyrazol-5-one (BAPP), was revealed to act on the point downstream of SA biosynthesis in the SA-mediated signaling pathway in Arabidopsis, similarly to CMPA [16]. In contrast, BAPP contains a carbonyl group at the five position and a large substituent at the three position of the pyrazole ring. A recently developed plant activator, dichlobentiaox (3-(3,4-dichloro-1,2-thiazole-5-ilmethoxy)-1,2-benzothiazole-1,1-dioxide), contains benzoisothiazole and isothiazole rings, which are speculated to induce SAR in rice [40]. Thus, 1,2-azole moiety may be important for the activation of plant immunity. Analysis of the SAR induction activity of various types of 1,2-azole-type chemicals would be crucial to clarifying the regulatory mechanism of SA signal perception.
Treatment with CMPA did not result in resistance against CMV infection, whereas SAR was reportedly effective against CMV [41], suggesting that the mode of action of CMPA is different from that of other plant activators. When CMPA was applied to Arabidopsis leaves at high concentrations (>6.25 mM), tissue necrosis, similar to cell death during a hypersensitive response, was observed. This side effect was not observed at low CMPA treatment concentrations. Moreover, low CMPA concentrations did not affect the induction of resistance against bacterial and fungal pathogens. However, the combination of the invisible side effects, even at low concentrations, and the damage to the foliar surface due to rub inoculation with carborundum may explain why CMPA is not effective against CMV. As such a high-concentration solution cannot be prepared for water-insoluble BTH, INA or NCI, leaf necrosis is a specific characteristic of CMPA. Thus, this study revealed that CMPA is a novel type of plant activator, which stimulates the downstream of SA in the SA–NPR1-mediated pathway for SAR induction but induces a different spectrum of disease resistance.

4. Materials and Methods

4.1. Plant Materials and Treatment

Arabidopsis thaliana plants were grown in sterilized potting soil Kumiai Nippi 1 (Nihon Hiryo, Tokyo, Japan) in pots (5 × 5 × 5 cm) inside a growth chamber under a 16 h:8 h light:dark cycle at 23 °C with 60% humidity. The three-week-old Arabidopsis plants were treated with CMPA, BIT, BTH, or water via soil drenching or via foliar spraying.

4.2. Arabidopsis Pathogen Infection Assay

Pst was inoculated by dipping the plants in a bacterial solution (2 × 105 colony-forming units/mL in 10 mM MgCl2) [24]. The leaves were harvested from the inoculated plants three days after inoculation and homogenized in 10 mM MgCl2. The homogenates were plated on nutrient broth agar containing rifampicin (50 mg/mL) at appropriate dilutions. After incubation for two days at 28 °C, the rifampicin-resistant bacterial colonies were counted. Bacterial growth was estimated using eight homogenates prepared from three leaves for each treatment.
Drop inoculation of the fungal pathogens was performed by placing 3 µL of spore suspension of Ch (1 × 106 spores/mL in water) or Bc (1 × 106 spores/mL in 1/2 PDB medium) onto detached leaves that were placed on wet filter paper in a plastic box [42,43]. The box was sealed to maintain high humidity and incubated in the dark for three days at 25 °C. The areas of the lesions and whole leaves were measured using ImageJ software (ver 1.53). More than 30 leaves were used for each treatment, and the average ratio of the lesions to the whole leaf area was calculated to estimate the disease susceptibility.
CMV (20 µg/mL) was inoculated on a lower leaf of the plant via the rub inoculation method using carborundum [41]. The presence of viral coat protein in the plant tissues was detected via the tissue printing method at zero, three, and seven days after inoculation. The tissue printing method was performed by press blotting all the plants on filter papers, followed by probing the filters with a polyclonal anti-CMV-Y coat protein antibody.

4.3. Analysis of Gene Expression by RT–qPCR Analysis

The leaves were harvested 2 days after the application of the chemicals. The total RNA was extracted from the frozen leaf samples using Sepasol®-RNA I Super G (Nacalai Tesque Co., Ltd., Kyoto, Japan). The total RNA was used for the cDNA synthesis using the PrimeScript™ RT Reagent Kit with gDNA Eraser (Perfect Real Time) (Takara Bio Inc., Shiga, Japan). For the RT–qPCR, each cDNA sample was amplified using gene-specific primers (Supplementary Table S2) using TB Green® Premix Ex Taq™ II (Tli RNaseH Plus) (Takara Bio Inc., Shiga, Japan) and a LightCycler® 96 System (Roche Diagnostics K.K. Tokyo, Japan) [16]. Four to six biological replicates were used.

4.4. Extraction and Analysis of SA

Leaves were harvested from the treated plants two and five days post treatment with CMPA or water. The levels of SA and SAG were measured as previously described [24,44].

4.5. Extraction and Analysis of GSH

Leaf samples (approximately 100 mg for each sample) were harvested 0, 6, 12, 24 and 48 h after foliar treatment with CMPA. The extraction and measurement of GSH were performed as previously described [45,46]. Briefly, the GSH content in the leaf extract was determined via monobromobimane (Invitrogen) labeling of the thiol bases after the reduction of the extracts with dithiothreitol (Nacalai Tesque Co., Ltd., Japan). The labeled products were analyzed via HPLC with a fluorescence detector FP-920 (JASCO) using a TSKgel ODS-120T column (4.6 × 150 mm, Tosoh, Tokyo, Japan). The fluorescence of the thiol-bimane adducts was detected at 478 nm under excitation at 390 nm. The GSH standards were purchased from Nacalai Tesque.

Supplementary Materials

The following supporting information can be downloaded at https://www.mdpi.com/article/10.3390/ijms24109037/s1.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, H.N.; methodology, M.K., H.T., A.M.-N. and H.N.; validation, M.Y., M.F., M.K., H.T., A.M.-N., T.A. and H.N.; investigation, M.Y., M.F., K.S., H.T., T.T. and F.N.; resources, M.K., H.T., A.M.-N. and H.N.; writing—original draft preparation, M.F. and M.Y.; writing—review and editing, A.M.-N., T.A. and H.N.; visualization, M.F. and M.Y.; project administration, H.N.; funding acquisition, M.F. and H.N. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This work received partial support from the Grant-in-Aid for JSPS Fellows 19J14665 for M.F. and from JSPS KAKENHI Grant Number 18K05656 for H.N.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

Data are available on request.

Acknowledgments

We thank Masanori Nishioka and the staff of Nissan Chemical Industries, Ltd., for providing the CMPA and useful discussion.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Chester, K.S. The problem of acquired physiological immunity in plants. Q. Rev. Biol. 1933, 8, 275–324. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Durner, J.; Shah, J.; Klessig, D.F. Salicylic acid and disease resistance in plants. Trends Plant Sci. 1997, 2, 266–274. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Spoel, S.H. Signal Transduction in Systemic Immunity. Plant Cell 2019, 31, 1412–1413. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  4. Métraux, J.P.; Signer, H.; Ryals, J.; Ward, E.; Wyss-Benz, M.; Gaudin, J.; Raschdorf, K.; Schmid, E.; Blum, W.; Inverardi, B. Increase in salicylic Acid at the onset of systemic acquired resistance in cucumber. Science 1990, 250, 1004–1006. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Ward, E.R.; Uknes, S.J.; Williams, S.C.; Dincher, S.S.; Wiederhold, D.L.; Alexander, D.C.; Ahl-Goy, P.; Metraux, J.P.; Ryals, J.A. Coordinate Gene Activity in Response to Agents That Induce Systemic Acquired Resistance. Plant Cell 1991, 3, 1085–1094. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  6. Gaffney, T.; Friedrich, L.; Vernooij, B.; Negrotto, D.; Nye, G.; Uknes, S.; Ward, E.; Kessmann, H.; Ryals, J. Requirement of salicylic Acid for the induction of systemic acquired resistance. Science 1993, 261, 754–756. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Delaney, T.P.; Uknes, S.; Vernooij, B.; Friedrich, L.; Weymann, K.; Negrotto, D.; Gaffney, T.; Gut-Rella, M.; Kessmann, H.; Ward, E.; et al. A central role of salicylic Acid in plant disease resistance. Science 1994, 266, 1247–1250. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Wildermuth, M.C.; Dewdney, J.; Wu, G.; Ausubel, F.M. Isochorismate Synthase is Required to Synthesize Salicylic Acid for Plant Defence. Nature 2001, 414, 562–565. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Torrens-Spence, M.P.; Bobokalonova, A.; Carballo, V.; Glinkerman, C.M.; Pluskal, T.; Shen, A.; Weng, J.-K. PBS3 and EPS1 complete salicylic acid biosynthesis from isochorismate in Arabidopsis. Mol. Plant 2019, 12, 1577–1586. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Lefevere, H.; Bauters, L.; Gheysen, G. Salicylic Acid Biosynthesis in Plants. Front. Plant Sci. 2020, 11, 338. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Cao, H.; Glazebrook, J.; Clarke, J.D.; Volko, S.; Dong, X. The Arabidopsis NPR1 gene that controls systemic acquired resistance encodes a novel protein containing ankyrin repeats. Cell 1997, 88, 57–63. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Ding, Y.; Sun, T.; Ao, K.; Peng, Y.; Zhang, Y.; Li, X.; Zhang, Y. Opposite roles of salicylic acid receptors NPR1 and NPR3/NPR4 in transcriptional regulation of plant immunity. Cell 2018, 173, 1454–1467. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Wang, W.; Withers, J.; Li, H.; Zwack, P.J.; Rusnac, D.V.; Shi, H.; Liu, L.; Yan, S.; Hinds, T.R.; Guttman, M.; et al. Structural basis of salicylic acid perception by Arabidopsis NPR proteins. Nature 2020, 586, 311–316. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Kumar, S.; Zavaliev, R.; Wu, Q.; Zhou, Y.; Cheng, J.; Dillard, L.; Powers, J.; Withers, J.; Zhao, J.; Guan, Z.; et al. Structural basis of NPR1 in activating plant immunity. Nature 2022, 605, 561–566. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  15. Mou, Z.; Fan, W.; Dong, X. Inducers of Plant Systemic Acquired Resistance Regulate NPR1 Function through Redox Changes. Cell 2003, 113, 935–944. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  16. Kusajima, M.; Fujita, M.; Yamakawa, H.; Ushiwatari, T.; Mori, T.; Tsukamoto, K.; Hayashi, H.; Maruyama-Nakashita, A.; Che, F.S.; Nakashita, H. Characterization of plant immunity-activating mechanism by a pyrazole derivative. Biosci. Biotechnol. Biochem. 2020, 84, 1427–1435. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Watanabe, T.; Igarashi, H.; Matsumoto, K.; Seki, S.; Mase, S.; Sekizawa, Y. The characteristics of probenazole (oryzemate®) for the control of rice blast. J. Pestic. Sci. 1977, 2, 291–296. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Friedrich, L.; Lawton, K.; Ruessz, W.; Masner, P.; Specker, N.; Rella, M.G.; Meier, B.; Dincher, S.; Staub, T.; Uknes, S.; et al. A benzothiadiazole derivative induces systemic acquired resistance in tobacco. Plant J. 1996, 10, 61–70. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Yasuda, M.; Nakashita, H.; Yoshida, S. Tiadinil, a Novel Class of Activator of Systemic Acquired Resistance, Induces Defense Gene Expression and Disease Resistance in Tobacco. J. Pestic. Sci. 2004, 29, 46–49. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Zhou, M.; Wang, W. Recent advances in synthetic chemical inducers of plant immunity. Front. Plant Sci. 2018, 9, 1613. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  21. Yang, B.; Yang, S.; Zheng, W.; Wang, Y. Plant immunity inducers: From discovery to agricultural application. Stress Biol. 2022, 2, 5. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Lawton, K.A.; Friedrich, L.; Hunt, M.; Weymann, K.; Delaney, T.; Kessmann, H.; Staub, T.; Ryals, J. Benzothiadiazole Induces Disease Resistance in Arabidopsis by Activation of the Systemic Acquired Resistance Signal Transduction Pathway. Plant J. 1996, 10, 71–82. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  23. Yasuda, M.; Ishikawa, A.; Jikumaru, Y.; Seki, M.; Umezawa, T.; Asami, T.; Maruyama-Nakashita, A.; Kudo, T.; Shinozaki, K.; Yoshida, S.; et al. Antagonistic Interaction between Systemic Acquired Resistance and the Abscisic Acid–mediated Abiotic Stress Response in Arabidopsis. Plant Cell 2008, 20, 1678–1692. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Yoshioka, K.; Nakashita, H.; Klessig, D.F.; Yamaguchi, I. Probenazole Induces Systemic Acquired Resistance in Arabidopsis with a Novel Type of Action. Plant J. 2001, 25, 149–157. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Nakashita, H. Studies on regulation of plant physiology by pesticides. J. Pestic. Sci. 2021, 46, 393–398. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  26. Nakashita, H.; Kusajima, M.; Kato, H.; Fujita, M. Regulation of SA-Mediated Signal Transduction in Plant Immune System. In Salicylic Acid—A Versatile Plant Growth Regulator; Hayat, S., Siddiqui, H., Damalas, C.A., Eds.; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2021; pp. 235–247. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Nakashita, H.; Yoshioka, K.; Yasuda, M.; Nitta, T.; Arai, Y.; Yoshida, S.; Yamaguchi, I. Probenazole Induces Systemic Acquired Resistance in Tobacco through Salicylic Acid Accumulation. Physiol. Mol. Plant Pathol. 2002, 61, 197–203. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Vernooij, B.; Friedrich, L.; Goy, P.A.; Staub, T.; Kessmann, H.; Ryals, J. 2,6-dichloroisonicotinic acid-induced resistance to pathogens without the accumulation of salicylic acid. Mol. Plant Microbe Interact. 1995, 8, 228–234. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Yoshida, H.; Konishi, K.; Koike, K.; Nakagawa, T.; Sekido, S.; Yamaguchi, I. Effect of N-cyanomethyl-2-chloroisonicotinamide for control of rice blast. J. Pestic. Sci. 1990, 15, 413–417. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Nakashita, H.; Yasuda, M.; Nishioka, M.; Hasegawa, S.; Arai, Y.; Uramoto, M.; Yoshida, S.; Yamaguchi, I. Chloroisonicotinamide Derivative Induces a Broad Range of Disease Resistance in Rice and Tobacco. Plant Cell Physiol. 2002, 43, 823–831. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Yasuda, M.; Nakashita, H.; Hasegawa, S.; Nishioka, M.; Arai, Y.; Uramoto, M.; Yamaguchi, I.; Yoshida, S. N-cyanomethyl-2-chloroisonicotinamide induces systemic acquired resistance in Arabidopsis without salicylic acid accumulation. Biosci. Biotechnol. Biochem. 2003, 67, 322–328. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Nishioka, M.; Nakashita, H.; Suzuki, H.; Akiyama, S.; Yoshida, S.; Yamaguchi, I. Induction of Resistance against Rice Blast Disease by a Novel Class of Plant Activator, Pyrazolecarboxylic Acid Derivatives. J. Pestic. Sci. 2003, 28, 416–421. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Nishioka, M.; Nakashita, H.; Yasuda, M.; Yoshida, S.; Yamaguchi, I. Induction of Resistance against Rice Bacterial Leaf Blight by 3-Chloro-1-methyl-1H-pyrazole-5-carboxylic Acid. J. Pestic. Sci. 2005, 30, 47–49. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Yasuda, M.; Nishioka, M.; Nakashita, H.; Yamaguchi, I.; Yoshida, S. Pyrazolecarboxylic Acid Derivative Induces Systemic Acquired Resistance in Tobacco. Biosci. Biotechnol. Biochem. 2003, 67, 2614–2620. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Govrin, E.; Levine, A. Infection of Arabidopsis with a necrotrophic pathogen, Botrytis cinerea, elicits various defense responses but does not induce systemic acquired resistance (SAR). Plant Mol. Biol. 2002, 48, 267–276. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Ferrari, S.; Plotnikova, J.M.; De Lorenzo, G.; Ausubel, F.M. Arabidopsis local resistance to Botrytis cinerea involves salicylic acid and camalexin and requires EDS4 and PAD2, but not SID2, EDS5 or PAD4. Plant J. 2003, 35, 193–205. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  37. Audenaert, K.; De Meyer, G.B.; Höfte, M.M. Abscisic acid determines basal susceptibility of tomato to Botrytis cinerea and suppresses salicylic acid-dependent signaling mechanisms. Plant Physiol. 2002, 128, 491–501. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  38. De Meyer, G.; Capieau, K.; Audenaert, K.; Buchala, A.; Métraux, J.P.; Höfte, M. Nanogram amounts of salicylic acid produced by the rhizobacterium Pseudomonas aeruginosa 7NSK2 activate the systemic acquired resistance pathway in bean. Mol. Plant Microbe Interact. 1999, 12, 450–458. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Zheng, L.; Campbell, M.; Murphy, J.; Lam, S.; Xu, J.R. The BMP1 gene is essential for pathogenicity in the gray mold fungus Botrytis cinerea. Mol. Plant Microbe Interact. 2000, 13, 724–732. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Food Safety Commission of Japan. Dichlobentiazox (Pesticides). Food Saf. (Tokyo) 2020, 8, 6–7. [Google Scholar]
  41. Ando, S.; Jaskiewicz, M.; Mochizuki, S.; Koseki, S.; Miyashita, S.; Takahashi, H.; Conrath, U. Priming for enhanced ARGONAUTE2 activation accompanies induced resistance to cucumber mosaic virus in Arabidopsis thaliana. Mol. Plant Pathol. 2021, 22, 19–30. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  42. Chanda, B.; Venugopal, S.C.; Kulshrestha, S.; Navarre, D.A.; Downie, B.; Vaillancourt, L.; Kachroo, A.; Kachroo, P. Glycerol-3-phosphate levels are associated with basal resistance to the hemibiotrophic fungus Colletotrichum higginsianum in Arabidopsis. Plant Physiol. 2008, 147, 2017–2029. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  43. Hevia, M.A.; Canessa, P.; Müller-Esparza, H.; Larrondo, L.F. A circadian oscillator in the fungus Botrytis cinerea regulates virulence when infecting Arabidopsis thaliana. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2015, 112, 8744–8749. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  44. Kusajima, M.; Fujita, M.; Soudthedlath, K.; Nakamura, H.; Yoneyama, K.; Nomura, T.; Akiyama, K.; Maruyama-Nakashita, A.; Asami, T.; Nakashita, H. Strigolactones Modulate Salicylic Acid-Mediated Disease Resistance in Arabidopsis thaliana. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2022, 23, 5246. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Morikawa-Ichinose, T.; Kim, S.J.; Allahham, A.; Kawaguchi, R.; Maruyama-Nakashita, A. Glucosinolate Distribution in the Aerial Parts of sel1-10, a Disruption Mutant of the Sulfate Transporter SULTR1;2, in Mature Arabidopsis thaliana Plants. Plants 2019, 8, 95. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  46. Kimura, Y.; Ushiwatari, T.; Suyama, A.; Tominaga-Wada, R.; Wada, T.; Maruyama-Nakashita, A. Contribution of Root Hair Development to Sulfate Uptake in Arabidopsis. Plants 2019, 8, 106. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Ijms 24 09037 g001 550
Figure 1. Effects of CMPA treatment on disease resistance in wild-type Arabidopsis plants. (A) Growth of Pst in CMPA-treated plants. Three-week-old Col-0 plants were treated with water (control) or CMPA (0.25 mg/pot) via the soil drenching method five days prior to inoculation with Pst (2 × 105 cfu/mL). The population of Pst in the leaves was estimated three days after inoculation based on their growth on nutrient broth agar plates after homogenization in 10 mM MgCl2. Each experiment was performed with 10 samples prepared from three leaves. Values are shown as the means ± SE. (B,C) Lesion spreading of Ch (B) and Bc (C) in CMPA-treated plants. Three-week-old plants were treated with water (control) or CMPA (1.25 mM) via spraying five days prior to inoculation. Quantification of the lesion spreading of 30 independent virulence assays. Values are shown as the means ± SE. Significant differences between the control and CMPA-treated plants are indicated by asterisks. (Unpaired student’s t-test, * p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01.)
Figure 1. Effects of CMPA treatment on disease resistance in wild-type Arabidopsis plants. (A) Growth of Pst in CMPA-treated plants. Three-week-old Col-0 plants were treated with water (control) or CMPA (0.25 mg/pot) via the soil drenching method five days prior to inoculation with Pst (2 × 105 cfu/mL). The population of Pst in the leaves was estimated three days after inoculation based on their growth on nutrient broth agar plates after homogenization in 10 mM MgCl2. Each experiment was performed with 10 samples prepared from three leaves. Values are shown as the means ± SE. (B,C) Lesion spreading of Ch (B) and Bc (C) in CMPA-treated plants. Three-week-old plants were treated with water (control) or CMPA (1.25 mM) via spraying five days prior to inoculation. Quantification of the lesion spreading of 30 independent virulence assays. Values are shown as the means ± SE. Significant differences between the control and CMPA-treated plants are indicated by asterisks. (Unpaired student’s t-test, * p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01.)
Ijms 24 09037 g001
Ijms 24 09037 g002 550
Figure 2. Expression of defense-related genes in wild-type Arabidopsis plants. Three-week-old plants were treated with water (control), BIT (1 mM), BTH (0.2 mM), or CMPA (0.5 mM) via spraying. The leaves were collected two days after treatment. An RT–PCR analysis was performed to evaluate the expression of (A) PR1, PR2, PR5, and ICS1 and (B) VSP2, PDF1.2, and ERF1. The transcript levels were normalized to the expression of UBQ2 measured in the same samples. Values are shown as the means ± SE (n = 6). Significant difference between the control and chemical-treated plants are indicated by asterisks. (Unpaired student’s t-test, ** p < 0.01.)
Figure 2. Expression of defense-related genes in wild-type Arabidopsis plants. Three-week-old plants were treated with water (control), BIT (1 mM), BTH (0.2 mM), or CMPA (0.5 mM) via spraying. The leaves were collected two days after treatment. An RT–PCR analysis was performed to evaluate the expression of (A) PR1, PR2, PR5, and ICS1 and (B) VSP2, PDF1.2, and ERF1. The transcript levels were normalized to the expression of UBQ2 measured in the same samples. Values are shown as the means ± SE (n = 6). Significant difference between the control and chemical-treated plants are indicated by asterisks. (Unpaired student’s t-test, ** p < 0.01.)
Ijms 24 09037 g002
Ijms 24 09037 g003 550
Figure 3. Accumulation of free and total salicylic acid and GSH in wild-type Arabidopsis plants treated with CMPA. (A) SA measurement in CMPA-treated leaves. Leaves were harvested two and five days after treatment with water (control) or CMPA (0.25 mg/pot) via soil drenching, and the free and total SA (free SA + SA glucoside) levels were quantified by means of HPLC. Values are shown as the means ± SD. Closed square (yellow), control; closed circle (red), CMPA. (B) GSH levels in leaves treated with CMPA. Leaves were harvested at 6, 12, 24, and 48 h after spraying with 0.125 mM CMPA, and the GSH levels were quantified by means of HPLC. Values are shown as the means ± SE. Significant difference between the control and chemical-treated plants are indicated by asterisks. (Unpaired student’s t-test, ** p < 0.01.)
Figure 3. Accumulation of free and total salicylic acid and GSH in wild-type Arabidopsis plants treated with CMPA. (A) SA measurement in CMPA-treated leaves. Leaves were harvested two and five days after treatment with water (control) or CMPA (0.25 mg/pot) via soil drenching, and the free and total SA (free SA + SA glucoside) levels were quantified by means of HPLC. Values are shown as the means ± SD. Closed square (yellow), control; closed circle (red), CMPA. (B) GSH levels in leaves treated with CMPA. Leaves were harvested at 6, 12, 24, and 48 h after spraying with 0.125 mM CMPA, and the GSH levels were quantified by means of HPLC. Values are shown as the means ± SE. Significant difference between the control and chemical-treated plants are indicated by asterisks. (Unpaired student’s t-test, ** p < 0.01.)
Ijms 24 09037 g003
Ijms 24 09037 g004 550
Figure 4. Effects of CMPA treatment on disease resistance and defense-related genes in SA-deficient Arabidopsis plants. (A) Expression levels of defense-related genes in the leaves of the sid2 mutants treated with chemicals. Three-week-old plants were treated with water (control), BIT (1 mM), BTH (0.2 mM), or CMPA (0.5 mM) via spraying. The leaves were collected two days after treatment. An RT–qPCR analysis was performed to evaluate the expression of the PR1, PR2, and PR5 genes. The transcript levels were normalized to the expression of UBQ2 measured in the same samples. Values are shown as the means ± SE (n = 6). (Unpaired student’s t-test, ** p < 0.01.) (B) Growth of Pst in the SA-deficient mutant plants treated with chemicals. Three-week-old NahG and sid2 plants were treated with water (control), BIT (0.5 mg/mL), BTH (0.1 mg/pot), or CMPA (0.25 mg/pot) via the soil drenching method five days prior to inoculation with Pst. The bacterial population in the leaves was estimated three days after inoculation. Each experiment was performed with 6 samples that were prepared from 3 leaves via homogenizing leaf disks in 10 mM MgCl2. Values are shown as the means ± SE (n = 6) (Unpaired student’s t-test, ** p < 0.01.)
Figure 4. Effects of CMPA treatment on disease resistance and defense-related genes in SA-deficient Arabidopsis plants. (A) Expression levels of defense-related genes in the leaves of the sid2 mutants treated with chemicals. Three-week-old plants were treated with water (control), BIT (1 mM), BTH (0.2 mM), or CMPA (0.5 mM) via spraying. The leaves were collected two days after treatment. An RT–qPCR analysis was performed to evaluate the expression of the PR1, PR2, and PR5 genes. The transcript levels were normalized to the expression of UBQ2 measured in the same samples. Values are shown as the means ± SE (n = 6). (Unpaired student’s t-test, ** p < 0.01.) (B) Growth of Pst in the SA-deficient mutant plants treated with chemicals. Three-week-old NahG and sid2 plants were treated with water (control), BIT (0.5 mg/mL), BTH (0.1 mg/pot), or CMPA (0.25 mg/pot) via the soil drenching method five days prior to inoculation with Pst. The bacterial population in the leaves was estimated three days after inoculation. Each experiment was performed with 6 samples that were prepared from 3 leaves via homogenizing leaf disks in 10 mM MgCl2. Values are shown as the means ± SE (n = 6) (Unpaired student’s t-test, ** p < 0.01.)
Ijms 24 09037 g004
Ijms 24 09037 g005 550
Figure 5. Effects of CMPA treatment on disease resistance and defense-related genes in the Arabidopsis npr1 mutant. (A) Expression levels of PR1, PR2, and PR5 in the leaves of the npr1 mutant treated with chemicals. Three-week-old plants were treated with water (control), BIT (1 mM), BTH (0.2 mM), or CMPA (0.5 mM) via spraying. The leaves were collected two days after treatment. An RT–qPCR analysis was performed to evaluate the expression of the PR1, PR2 and PR5 genes. The transcript levels were normalized to the expression of UBQ2 measured in the same samples. Values are shown as the means ±SE (n = 4). (B) Growth of Pst in the npr1 mutant treated with chemicals. Three-week-old npr1 plants were treated with water (control), BIT (0.5 mg/mL), BTH (0.1 mg/pot), or CMPA (0.25 mg/pot) via the soil drenching method five days prior to inoculation with Pst. The bacterial population in the leaves was estimated three days after inoculation. Each experiment was performed with 6 samples that were prepared from 3 leaves via homogenizing leaf disks in 10 mM MgCl2. Values are shown as the means ± SE (n = 6).
Figure 5. Effects of CMPA treatment on disease resistance and defense-related genes in the Arabidopsis npr1 mutant. (A) Expression levels of PR1, PR2, and PR5 in the leaves of the npr1 mutant treated with chemicals. Three-week-old plants were treated with water (control), BIT (1 mM), BTH (0.2 mM), or CMPA (0.5 mM) via spraying. The leaves were collected two days after treatment. An RT–qPCR analysis was performed to evaluate the expression of the PR1, PR2 and PR5 genes. The transcript levels were normalized to the expression of UBQ2 measured in the same samples. Values are shown as the means ±SE (n = 4). (B) Growth of Pst in the npr1 mutant treated with chemicals. Three-week-old npr1 plants were treated with water (control), BIT (0.5 mg/mL), BTH (0.1 mg/pot), or CMPA (0.25 mg/pot) via the soil drenching method five days prior to inoculation with Pst. The bacterial population in the leaves was estimated three days after inoculation. Each experiment was performed with 6 samples that were prepared from 3 leaves via homogenizing leaf disks in 10 mM MgCl2. Values are shown as the means ± SE (n = 6).
Ijms 24 09037 g005
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Yasuda, M.; Fujita, M.; Soudthedlath, K.; Kusajima, M.; Takahashi, H.; Tanaka, T.; Narita, F.; Asami, T.; Maruyama-Nakashita, A.; Nakashita, H. Characterization of Disease Resistance Induced by a Pyrazolecarboxylic Acid Derivative in Arabidopsis thaliana. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2023, 24, 9037. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms24109037

AMA Style

Yasuda M, Fujita M, Soudthedlath K, Kusajima M, Takahashi H, Tanaka T, Narita F, Asami T, Maruyama-Nakashita A, Nakashita H. Characterization of Disease Resistance Induced by a Pyrazolecarboxylic Acid Derivative in Arabidopsis thaliana. International Journal of Molecular Sciences. 2023; 24(10):9037. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms24109037

Chicago/Turabian Style

Yasuda, Michiko, Moeka Fujita, Khamsalath Soudthedlath, Miyuki Kusajima, Hideki Takahashi, Tomoya Tanaka, Futo Narita, Tadao Asami, Akiko Maruyama-Nakashita, and Hideo Nakashita. 2023. "Characterization of Disease Resistance Induced by a Pyrazolecarboxylic Acid Derivative in Arabidopsis thaliana" International Journal of Molecular Sciences 24, no. 10: 9037. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms24109037

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop